Nos últimos anos as expressões “medidas de austeridade”, “crise económica” e “troika” têm sido frequentemente usadas nas conversas da maioria dos cidadãos europeus. Agora, que a maioria dos países parece ter conseguido reconstruir as suas economias, gostaríamos de perceber a extensão dos danos colaterais provocados pelas medidas de austeridade adotadas. Ao longo deste artigo analisaremos o impacto causado em matéria de direitos humanos. Para alcançar este objetivo foram analisados três casos, o primeiro decidido pelo Comité Europeu dos Direitos Sociais, e o segundo e terceiro pelo Tribunal Europeu dos Direitos do Homem. Todos os casos dizem respeito à adoção de medidas de austeridade na Grécia e em Portugal aquando da crise económica de 2009. Com base em relatórios oficiais e em diferentes posições doutrinárias, concluímos que a adoção de medidas de austeridade teve repercussões profundas nos direitos humanos. Não obstante, esse impacto pode ser contido. Numa segunda etapa deste artigo, exploramos a relação entre as duas instituições acima mencionadas e a forma como se complementam, embora muito trabalho tenha de ser feito para fomentar a interação e assim garantir uma maior proteção dos direitos humanos.

Over the past years, the expressions “austerity measures”, “economic crisis” and “troika” have been frequently used in the conversations of most European citizens. Now that most of the countries seem to have rebuilt their economies, we would like to understand the extent of the collateral damages. In this paper, we will be analysing the impact of the adoption of austerity measures on human rights issues. In order to reach this goal, we will be analysing three different cases (the first one was decided by the European Committee of Social Rights, and the others by the European Court of Human Rights). All cases are related to the austerity measures used in Greece and in Portugal at the time of the economic crisis. Drawing on official reports and on previous literature, we have concluded that the austerity policies have had a deep repercussion on human rights. However, that impact can be contained. In a second stage, we have explored the relationship between the two aforementioned institutions and observed that they complement each other, notwithstanding the fact that a lot of work still needs to be done to optimise that interaction, in order to guarantee greater protection to human rights.

Vaccination is the method of choice for the prevention of influenza infection. However, the quantity of the antigen available, especially in the case of pandemics, often fails to meet the global demand. However, improved adjuvants can overcome this problem. Preliminary results obtained in this study revealed that one year after a single subcutaneous immunisation with influenza A H3N2 virus in an oil-based carrier, VaxcineTM, outbreed mice produced a high immunoglobulin G response that lasted for up to one year and exhibited less variation in titre compared with the response of the control group treated with alum. The haemagglutination-inhibition titres induced by VaxcineTM were also higher than those generated by alum. These data indicate that VaxcineTM is a good adjuvant candidate for seasonal influenza vaccines.